On Fri, 12 Apr 2019 at 16:20, Konstantin Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 03:28:26PM +0100, Edward Napierala wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 17:26, Conrad Meyer <c...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Edward, > > > > > > I have a question about this change below. > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 4:22 AM Edward Tomasz Napierala > > > <tr...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Author: trasz > > > > Date: Thu Apr 11 11:21:45 2019 > > > > New Revision: 346120 > > > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/346120 > > > > > > > > Log: > > > > Use shared vnode locks for the ELF interpreter. > > > > [..] > > > > > On the one hand, perhaps VOP_IS_TEXT() is rarely false for common > > > interpreters anyway. On the other hand, there is sort of a > > > renaissance of static linking happening. So maybe the thought is, > > > !VOP_IS_TEXT is likely to be rare, and LK_UPGRADE success even more > > > rare, so why bother writing additional code for it? > > > > Konstantin already answered to most of the points, but regarding > > this one: that's exactly the case. In a typical case, the number of times > > this code path will be executed is zero. I'd expect one - when running > > dynamically linked ELF binary for the first time - but for some reason in > > that case lookup() returns with the exclusive vnode lock already held. > > This is strange. Which filesystem do you use ?
UFS. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
